nfoligno Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 I have not heard largest in NFL history. Maybe largest for a DE, or largest for our team. I was hearing Pepper's 40 million guaranteed was the largest in NFL history. Really? I thought Haynesworth and Stafford got like 50 million guaranteed in their contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyhigh697 Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 yes his contract is an nfl record LINK: http://espn.go.com/blog/ChicagoBears/post/...ffords-contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 I was hearing Pepper's 40 million guaranteed was the largest in NFL history. Really? I thought Haynesworth and Stafford got like 50 million guaranteed in their contracts. Stafford got $41.75 mil guaranteed, Haynesworth got $41 million. Peppers' guaranteed money is larger than either. Also, the total value of the contract is $91.5 million, not $72 million, according to Rotoworld. That said, who knows how much of that he'll ever see. A lot of it is in incentives for sacks, Pro Bowls, and Defensive Player of the Year awards. Also, if I'm reading this stuff right, of the $42 million in guaranteed money, $40.5 million is in the first 3 years of the deal. So if Peppers turns 34 and runs out of gas, the Bears aren't going to be on the hook for very much money. EDIT: Stafford's contract could be thought of as being larger than Peppers', because Stafford will make an additional $6 million for playing 35% of the offensive snaps as a rookie (which he easily did) and 45% of snaps over the life of his deal. That's practically guaranteed money, since he'll get it just for being the starter in 2010 and 2011. They could cut him after that, with three years left on his deal, and they'd still be on the hook for $47.75 million total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 Stafford got $41.75 mil guaranteed, Haynesworth got $41 million. Peppers' guaranteed money is larger than either. Also, the total value of the contract is $91.5 million, not $72 million, according to Rotoworld. That said, who knows how much of that he'll ever see. A lot of it is in incentives for sacks, Pro Bowls, and Defensive Player of the Year awards. I like the idea of giving him lots of monetary incentives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 I like the idea of giving him lots of monetary incentives. Yeah, definitely for a player with some questions about his motivation. Also, the total value reported to the media always includes all the incentives, even if they're practically impossible to hit. Albert Haynesworth's "$100 million deal" is never going to pay out close to a hundred million in the real world. I'll be interested to see if Peppers has a lot of likely-to-be-earned incentives (like bonuses for putting up 14 sacks a season or making the Pro Bowl or whatever) or whether they're mostly the unlikely-to-be-earned kind (like blocking 10 field goals or scoring 5 defensive TDs in a season.) The latter would make his contract cheaper for the team, but the former might get him to play at a higher level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted March 6, 2010 Report Share Posted March 6, 2010 Could be wrong, but I think the main reason for unlikely to be earned incentives has to do with the salary cap. No cap, no reason for that incentive language. I suspect he has incentives that are very likely (play 10 games or equal number of sacks) as well as incentives like Super bowl MVP. I don't expect him to have many incentives along the lines of (rush for 1,000 yards). Yeah, definitely for a player with some questions about his motivation. Also, the total value reported to the media always includes all the incentives, even if they're practically impossible to hit. Albert Haynesworth's "$100 million deal" is never going to pay out close to a hundred million in the real world. I'll be interested to see if Peppers has a lot of likely-to-be-earned incentives (like bonuses for putting up 14 sacks a season or making the Pro Bowl or whatever) or whether they're mostly the unlikely-to-be-earned kind (like blocking 10 field goals or scoring 5 defensive TDs in a season.) The latter would make his contract cheaper for the team, but the former might get him to play at a higher level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParkerBear7 Posted March 7, 2010 Report Share Posted March 7, 2010 The Bears Peppers signing certainly must have motivated the Packer to stop messing around as they re-signed veteran LT Chad Clifton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defiantgiant Posted March 7, 2010 Report Share Posted March 7, 2010 Could be wrong, but I think the main reason for unlikely to be earned incentives has to do with the salary cap. No cap, no reason for that incentive language. Well, for this year, sure, but the Bears have to be proceeding on the assumption that the cap will be reinstated. It would just be irresponsible to assume otherwise. So they've got to be thinking about the cap consequences for 2011 and beyond. Most big contracts (as far as I'm aware) have both LTBE incentives and UTBE ones. I'm just wondering what the balance is between them in Peppers' deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingtwig Posted March 7, 2010 Report Share Posted March 7, 2010 Well, for this year, sure, but the Bears have to be proceeding on the assumption that the cap will be reinstated. It would just be irresponsible to assume otherwise. So they've got to be thinking about the cap consequences for 2011 and beyond. Most big contracts (as far as I'm aware) have both LTBE incentives and UTBE ones. I'm just wondering what the balance is between them in Peppers' deal. The NFL will have to find away to grandfather these contracts in. I don't think it would be right to penalize a team for taking advantage of the uncapped year. Why should we assume that there will be a cap. Just because everyone says that there will be. Just a year ago no one ever thought the NFL would ever see a year with an uncapped year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted March 8, 2010 Report Share Posted March 8, 2010 I don't know about that. I have a feeling the owners have probably already talked about this, and those who want to write the big deals do so knowing they could be forced to deal w/ the effects of those deals once the cap is back. In the end though. as most of the money is pushed to year one on these deals, they really aren't cap busters when the cap returns, that is. The NFL will have to find away to grandfather these contracts in. I don't think it would be right to penalize a team for taking advantage of the uncapped year. Why should we assume that there will be a cap. Just because everyone says that there will be. Just a year ago no one ever thought the NFL would ever see a year with an uncapped year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.